‘Radiotherapy for Painful Bone Metastases: an Overview of the Overviews’

Abstract

The above Editorial was published in Volume 15 Issue 6 (pages 342–344). Unfortunately, some of the data in Table 1was presented incorrectly in the published version. The table is published correctly below.Table 1Comparison of the latest two meta-analyses on multi- vs single-fraction radiotherapy for painful bone metastasesWu et al. [4]Sze et al. [12]Date of acceptanceJuly 2002March 2003Abstracts eligible?YesYesForeign language reports eligible (with translation)?YesYesNon-published trials sought?NoNoIndividual patient data sought?NoNoNumber of trials considered eligible812Number of randomised patients32603508Overall response rate (intention-to-treat analysis)Multi-fraction arms58.7% (P=0.04)59% (P=0.7)Single-fraction arms62.1%60%Complete response rate (intention-to-treat analysis)Multi-fraction arms32.3% (P=0.5)32% (P=0.2)Single-fraction arms33.4%34%Overall response rate (with the number of evaluable patientsas denominators)Multi-fraction arms72.5% (P=0.9)No statistically significant difference∗“Repeated analyses ... excluding dropout patients only did not alter the conclusions” [5].Single-fraction arms72.7%Complete response rate (with the number of evaluable patients as denominators)Multi-fraction arms40.0% (P=0.6)No statistically significant difference∗“Repeated analyses ... excluding dropout patients only did not alter the conclusions” [5].Single-fraction arms39.2%∗ “Repeated analyses ... excluding dropout patients only did not alter the conclusions” [5]. Open table in a new tab The above Editorial was published in Volume 15 Issue 6 (pages 342–344). Unfortunately, some of the data in Table 1was presented incorrectly in the published version. The table is published correctly below.